Search This Blog

Subscribe to this blog

Follow by Email

The Best Law Schools For Practical Training

These days it's essential for law students to learn practical skills while in law school because law firms and clients have decided to no longer foot the bill for practical training after law school. The ABA is also considering mandating more practical skills training, so it's a good time for law schools to be proactive and take the initiative to create a practical-skills curriculum. I'm still surprised that it has taken over 20 years for practical skills training to take hold after the MacCrate Report was released in the early 90's, but better late than never!

The National Jurist recently unveiled its first honors for law schools that deliver practical training.

As The National Jurist noted, "[t]his is the first effort to try to quantify which schools are delivering on their promises to make legal education more experiential.”

As for the ranking process, "[t]he magazine based the ranking on four factors — three objective and one subjective. The three objective factors include the number of clinic positions per enrollment, the number of field placements or externships per enrollment, and the number of simulation courses per enrollment. The magazine pulled data from each school's 509 form. The magazine then contacted the 90 law schools that ranked the highest in that assessment and gathered detailed information on other practical training offerings. It then assigned a score based on the data."

Here are the top 60 schools in alphabetical order:

Baylor University School of Law
Boston University School of Law
Brigham Young University
Brooklyn Law School
Capital University
Case Western University
Catholic University
Chapman University
Cooley Law School
Duke University
Emory University
Florida Coastal School of Law
Golden Gate University
Gonzaga University
Hamline University
John Marshall Law School
Lewis & Clark Law School
Liberty University
Loyola University Chicago
Michigan State University
New York Law School
Northeastern University
Northwestern University
Pacific McGeorge School of Law
Pepperdine University
Rutgers — Camden
Saint Louis University
Santa Clara University
Seton Hall University
Southern Illinois University
Southwestern Law School
St. John's University
SUNY Buffalo Law School
Temple University
University of Arizona
University of Cincinnati
University of Colorado
University of Connecticut
University of Denver
University of Detroit
University of Georgia
University of Hawaii
University of Illinois
University of Kansas
University of Maryland
University of Massachusetts
University of Missouri — Kansas City
University of New Hampshire
University of Oregon
University of St. Thomas - Minneapolis
University of the District of Columbia
University of Utah
University of Washington
University of Wisconsin
Washburn University
Washington and Lee University
Washington University
Whittier Law School
William Mitchell College of Law
Yale Law School

The current version of Standard 601(3)(a) was developed during the Comprehensive Review as a method of involving a law library in the process of strategic planning required of a law school. It was envisioned that the planning and assessment taking place for a law school (under what was then Standard 203) would incorporate the work done by the library under this new Standard. To ensure that incorporation, it was decided that a written assessment should be completed by the library. However, when the requirement for strategic planning for a law school was removed during a later phase of the Comprehensive Review, no change was made to the new Standard 601. As a result, the library community has been left…

Law libraries are in the information business. To act as superior guides to this information, we must also be in the people business. We must be concerned with the people who seek our information. And we must be concerned with the people who guide those seekers to the information (i.e., our staff).

Contrary to popular belief, it's not easy to be a staff person in the rigid hierarchy of an academic law library. Particularly at a time when law libraries are facing increased budget pressures that require staff to do much more with much less. This is especially challenging with longtime staff who have seen their jobs change dramatically since they were hired. Many of these folks were not formally trained in librarianship, and they may be resistant to the flexibility needed in today's law library.

Given these challenges, how do we motivate our staff to be the very best guides to our information?

To that end, there was an enlightening program at the AALL Annual Conference in 2013 t…

As we further consider how to train future lawyers for the Algorithmic Society and develop the quality of thinking, listening, relating, collaborating, and learning that will define smartness in this new age, law schools must reach beyond their storied walls.

In law, we must got beyond talking about algorithmic implications to actually help shape algorithmic performance. We need lawyers and programmers to work together to create a sound "machine learning corpus." There's potential for an entirely new subfield to emerge if given the right support. With many law school attached to major research universities, it's a great place to start this cross-pollination and interdisciplinary work.

This type of interdisciplinary work would help to satisfy the career aspirations of advanced-degree seekers but also the wishes of many college presidents, deans, and faculty members who see an interdisciplinary professional education as a path to greater relevance, higher enrollments,…